>> ...you're perfectly entitled to install and run GPL'd software without
>> accepting the GPL, because those rights are already conferred to you by
>> the fair use doctrine of copyright.
> They are conferred[1], but not by fair use (in the US).
> [1] More precisely, they are not reserved for the copyright owner.
I'm not sure I understand. What/who confers them then?
Is it simply that those activities are not covered/restricted by the
copyright law because they are not considered as "copying"? I thought
installation was considered as a form of copying (and some people even
argued that running a program also creates a copy in RAM)?
Stefan
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
